In a struggle to be happy and free

Drystone Wall

Month: December 2005 Page 1 of 3

The final tale from the garage

I brought my car to the garage on Wednesday. My contact appeared not to be in so when I told the guy at the desk I wanted my CV boots checked, he was well on his way to making a work order describing a regular inspection. I told him what I’d been through over the last two weeks and he assured me we’d get to the bottom of it. My story must’ve seemed pretty ‘out there’ because as I walked to the waiting area, I heard him tell a tech to get my car on a hoist and inspect the boots so they could show me the work that’s been done. I smiled to myself and picked up a newspaper.

People were going in and out of the room as I waited but when I was some fifteen minutes into my newspaper, a man walked in from the garage area and said very clearly, “That is not the car I worked on.” I knew we were off to the races. He went into an office and I could only hear the odd word. I knew they were discussing my situation because I heard “boots” mentioned a few times. Their impromptu meeting went on for at least ten minutes when the guy who was manning the desk came out to me holding the work order from last week and the work order from than day. He said to me, “We owe you an apology because you are correct…the work was not done.”

He went on to explain he’s never heard of anything like it happening before but they certainly admitted I was in the right. He explained the work appears to have been done to the wrong car somehow. I told him that is exactly what I suspected until I realized it could not have happened so easily because of the car keys being kept with the work order. If the tech received my work order (which he did), how could he have worked on the wrong car when he had the right car key? My key wouldn’t work in another car, therefore he’d realize his mistake when trying to move the car into the service bay. The desk guy had no explanation for how it happened. He went on to tell me they’d be happy to do the job if I had the time to hang around. I explained that I did not, and I much preferred to be issued a refund and consider the issue closed. He was perfectly wiling to do so and I was driving back to work ten minutes later. So I have my money back and my dealings with that garage are at an end.

In thinking about it however, I’m still not really pleased. My contact apologized for their not repairing the tire and offered me a free oil change for my trouble…and this was before they knew they charged me $400 for nothing at all. Since he wasn’t there on Wednesday, the complimentary oil change seems to have evaporated, further demonstrating their inability to keep things organized. It also bothers me that despite their pure negligence, they felt refunding my money was the extent of what they should do. Please don’t misunderstand, refunding my money is all they’re obligated to do, but when a customer is charged for work not completed, and then discovers the mistake/subterfuge themselves, you don’t keep them as a customer by issuing a refund and making too big a deal about your willingness to admit you’re wrong.

After I spent two lunch hours fixing their mess, hearing their patting themselves on the back for admitting the problem isn’t going to keep me as a customer. Truth be told, I wouldn’t have accepted the oil change because I use synthetic oil and they do not offer it as an option. Still, I would’ve liked to feel they were willing to go a little further to keep me as a customer, after doing nothing to complete the work they were contracted to do in the first place.

As I said, my dealings with them are at an end. But perhaps the most shocking part I have not yet revealed is this garage is a Honda dealer. I could contact the Canadian head office and tell them my tale. I haven’t decided if I will, but the “it’s no big deal” impression I got from the staff in their interaction with me on Wednesday does not sit well. Not by a long-shot.

Still more tales from the garage

As this week started the car repair problem I’m having seemed to refuse to get any better. I called the garage today and asked to be transferred to my contact’s extension. The guy who answered said he’d put me right through. All he did was dial the extension, so I got the tones right in my ear, and then hung up. Then I got dial tone in the ear. Can this get any worse? Actually, I shouldn’t say this because I know it can get worse.

What I did was wait until they closed so I could call and dial the extension myself. I then left a voice mail message saying I could come in any day at lunch because all I want them to do is see for themselves the work isn’t done, and give me a refund. A service appointment is not necessary if I don’t want them to do any work.

More Tales From the Garage

Have you ever been in a circumstance that made you stop dead and rethink what’s happened because you’re sure such a thing belongs in a whacky movie script? This whole car repair thing is just such a circumstance for me. If you have no idea what I’m talking about, you missed the beginning of the story! Go back to my previous entry and read the first topic, then come back here. Okay, are we ready then?

Friday morning, as I put the key into my car door, I immediately noticed something was wrong. No, no tires were flat. Rather the centre console was wide open and my parents’ garage door opener was on the passenger seat. This wasn’t the way I left things the night before. Lovely, my car had been burgled. It’s never happened to me before in my building’s parking garage so I suppose I ought to be thankful it’s taken this long. The only thing the bastards made off with was my cassette adapter. I keep the inside of the car pretty bare because it’s been broken into at the Museum many times. When I park it there, I go to the trouble of opening the change compartment, the ash tray, the cup holder, the centre console, and the glove compartment so anyone looking inside can plainly see there’s nothing to steal. It’s worked so far but I haven’t taken this precaution at home. Perhaps I ought to start. I thought they’d taken my sunglasses, but I was pleased to later find them in my apartment.

Friday was a slow and careful drive to work because we had a lot of snow. All together, twenty-four centimetres over the course of the day. It’s the largest single-day snow fall since 1993. Things were a little slower than normal on the road, but nothing else was really different. Kudos to the snow removal crews! Montreal had it worse with over forty centimetres of snow on Friday.

I drive right past a garage near my office so I called them after I got to work. I asked if they do suspension work. They do. I asked if I could bring my car in to have the CV boots looked at. I could, and they do inspections for free. That’s great, but I explained they might want me to pay anyway. I imagine they do inspections for free because if work is required, there’s a good chance they’ll be asked to do it. Whether or not the CV boots required changing, they wouldn’t be doing it. The young lady on the phone said they’d be happy to do my inspection for free regardless. So I made an appointment for 12:30. Perfect.

I wanted to take photographs but I thought I’d ask after finding out they hadn’t been changed. If the boots had been changed, I could avoid asking the weird question. It occurred to me however, that they might lower the car and park it before giving me the news. I went back up to the counter (startling the woman with my stealthy approach it seems) and asked if they allowed customers into the service bay. She answered with a curious look. I explained that if the CV boots hadn’t been changed, I’d like some photographic evidence. She checked with the manager and there was no problem. Excellent! I expected to be told it was against policy or some other dodge.

CRW_03726.CRW: Digital Rebel, EF 17-40mm 1:4L @ 40mm, 1/100, f/5.6, 100 ISO, direct flash

My left outer CV boot. Does this look like only a single day of wear? Granted it doesn’t seem too bad for a ten year old piece of rubber, but I didn’t pay over $400 to keep the CV boots I already had!

Some ten minutes later I was deep into a newspaper article when I felt a tap on my shoulder and heard a voice behind me, “Have you got a moment?” I certainly did! The mechanic took me into the service bay saying very little. Walking under the car he pointed out the inner and outer CV boots as he asked, “Are you certain it was the outer boots that were changed?” I told him I was absolutely certain. He reached up and stuck his fingers into the accordion-like bellows of the CV boots revealing a well-worn crack along its bottom. I later realised he didn’t give me a diagnosis, but rather let me see for myself. The boots had not been changed. It’s exactly what I expected, but I was still shocked. How can this happen? I went to the other side and saw exactly the same thing in the other outer boot. The mechanic told me to go ahead and take photos if I wanted to, but to not get him or anyone else in them, and not to reveal where I brought the car. He explained the repair community is a small one and he wanted no trouble. I understood completely and promised his secret was safe with me. Too bad because I’d like to give them a kind mention as they were so good to me.

The photo is the left boot. My finger is the big blurry blob at the bottom holding the rubber apart to really show the cracking. It’s also visible in the valley to the right, where my finger is pointing, if you think I may be causing it by stretching the rubber. The image is about twice life-size. One of the guys offered to hold his flashlight on the area I wanted to photograph, but as soon as he saw my gear, he said “Oh,” realising I’d be able to make all the light I needed. I was amused. When I came out from under the car, I noticed a few of the other mechanics had come over because my flash had caught their notice. My mechanic was telling them why I was taking the pictures. I was doubly amused. I again offered to pay for their time but the mechanic would have none of it. I thanked him kindly and left.

So there I was driving back to work having learned my suspicion was true. Besides the tire, none of the work I brought the car in for was done … and the tire was only done because I spoke up about it when I came to collect the car. It really hadn’t been moved the whole time I left it there. There was no question about it, I had to call the garage. I really dislike confrontation, but I dislike being taken advantage of even more and simply will not put up with it. Just before I called them, it occurred to me they may have already tried to call me. I did leave a very unsatisfactory response in the survey they asked me to complete, and I did include my name and phone number. To be sure, I checked my voicemail and imagine my surprise when I discovered the guy who was manning the service desk the day before had left me a message regarding my survey response. I have to admit they were really quick to respond.

He apologized backward and forward, and offered me a free oil-change as an apology. He explained the mechanic who worked on my car took full responsibility for the tire not being properly repaired. The mechanic delegated the tire repair to an apprentice working with him and neglected to inspect the apprentice’s work. He next explained he fully understood why I might not feel confident in the CV boot replacement but they’d be happy to put my car up on the hoist and show me the work if I came down. I laughed a little to myself at this point.

So I called him back. He recognized me as soon as I said my name, and repeated his offer of showing me the work to allay my concerns. I explained I already took the car elsewhere to have it checked. Not only did I look at it myself but even my untrained eye could see the boots were not new. I believe he was genuinely shocked. Not in a “I don’t believe you” way, but that he was certain the tire was just a mistake and the mechanic really had done the CV boots as promised. He’s wrong, though.

He asked me if I could bring the car in later the same day. They close before I could make it there after work so this plan was a non-starter. Unfortunately, they’re only open late on Wednesday and Thursday so we make arrangements for Thursday. I am going to call him back however. I believe he’s made an appointment for me not only so they can confirm my claim that the work wasn’t completed, but also do to the work if they see I’m correct. In thinking about it however, I don’t want them to do the work. The most obvious reason is after this incredible screw-up, I won’t trust their fixing the problem and I’d rather not again take advantage of a free inspection somewhere else. Also, why should they have my business after such an incredible lapse? They profit on the work they do and I’d rather not contribute to their profit. A free oil change doesn’t cut it.

One thought I had made me reject their making the repair. It occurred to me this morning the most likely explanation I came up with was simply not possible. I’d thought the mechanic could have not looked closely enough at the work order and taken the wrong car in to do the work on. The problem with this is the car key. My key goes with my work order, so he couldn’t have just mistakenly taken the wrong car because the key wouldn’t have worked. On the off-chance the keys were mixed up, they would have given me the wrong key and I wouldn’t have been able to get into my own car. The only way this would work is if they mixed up the keys before the work and then ‘unmixed’ them afterwards, but this is just a bit too much to believe. It was either a mistake borne of gross negligence, or someone’s trying to pull a fast one. Either way, my business goes elsewhere.

So I’m going to call them back and give him the option of my presenting my car for their inspection any day during lunch if it’ll get me in sooner. I’ll accept a full refund and nothing less. Given the magnitude of their mistake I can’t imagine many would blame me for not wanting them to do the work. In telling this to my mother, she asked me what I’d do if they refused a refund and only offered to repair the car. I explained to her I’d tell them the only thing I’d accept is a refund. I paid for the work, and they claim to have done it, but in reality they did nothing but take my money. If they still refuse, I will get in my car and leave. My mom laughed saying I take after her. She will take no shit when a business tries to take advantage of her!

There are other avenues open to me, though I really don’t expect to have to pursue them. We’ll see.

Ass-covering

Speaking of politics and such, I received a couple of responses to a message I sent out. You’ll recall that I was extremely displeased about the memo written by Pubic Works Deputy Minister David Marshall. Don’t even get me started again. Just follow the link if you want more details. The most amusing thing about the situation is the Director himself didn’t know about the memo his overzealous Deputy wrote. I can imagine Marshall got an earful! Anyway, the key part of the memo read:

All persons recruited externally must be from designated groups (persons who are visible minorities, aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and women), except for cases having received ADM/CEO written approval. This measure will be in force until March 31, 2006, at which time we will re-assess our progress.

I flipped out and wrote a tersely worded message to the Public Works comment e‑mail address and also sent a carbon copy to my MP. Public Works replied two weeks ago describing what happened followed by an explanation:

However, as a result of the concern expressed in this regard, the Department has rescinded this special measure. We apologize for any confusion this proposed measure may have caused.

Confusion? So I read it incorrectly when I understood the directive to discriminate by race and/or sex? Bullshit. It’s ass-covering that flies in the face of reason. It’s insulting. Those who contacted Public Works in outrage understood exactly what the directive meant.

My MP replied last week, but did so via post with a paper letter:

Thank you for writing to me with your concerns. As you might have heard, Public Works Minister Scott Brison rescinded the directive you referred to on Monday, November 21, as soon as he became aware of it.

I trust that this action swiftly responded to your concerns. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

He signed it and wrote in pen,

Thank you for bringing this issue to my attention — I need your input.

It was very nice, and I feel almost guilty for saying this, but I can’t help wonder if the letter, and especially the handwritten comment, is because an election is coming next month. How’s that for cynical? Either way, I still do appreciate the letter. It’s far better than the idiotic Public Works response.

Same-sex errata

Apologies all around, folks. I made two mistake in my last entry so here I am, your errata guy.

First, I told you Stephen Harper has said nothing about same-sex marriage. This is incorrect. Second, I told you Paul Martin is after him wanting to know what the Conservative policy on same-sex marriage is. This is also untrue. Let me start with the second correction.

Paul Martin wants Harper to announce if he’ll use the notwithstanding clause to bypass the Charter of Rights and reverse the same-sex marriage legislation. Martin knows full well that if Harper says he is willing to do this, he’ll lose more votes than he’ll gain. If he says he won’t, but then does it anyway, people will go freaking ape-shit.

And Harper has spoken about same-sex marriage. In an article from The Washington Post, columnist Patrick Basham wrote, “Free-market economist Stephen Harper, leader of the opposition Conservative party, is pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto and socially conservative.”

Harper himself sent a letter to the editor saying Basham’s characterization was an over simplification of his position. No wonder, with the political climate being what it is, Harper would be dead in the water if voters saw him as a Conservative Canadian candidate with conservative American values. According to the CBC, he said of the same-sex marriage issue:

Regarding same-sex unions, he reiterated his position that he would vote to bring back the traditional definition of marriage. But he said those who already are married would continue to be recognized as legally wed.

That’s a whole lot of weaselling. He would vote to bring back the traditional definition of marriage, but why would he be voting? Who would call this vote and under what circumstances? I’m uneasy with all those unanswered questions. With what I know of the issues right now, there’d be a fair chance I’d vote Conservative if it weren’t for this one thing. But if Harper noodles about it, there’s no way he’ll get my vote. Right now it’s perhaps an independent, or spoiling my ballot. I’m certainly not going to vote Liberal, and I’d rather vote Conservative than NDP no matter what the Conservatives threaten to do! There are no parties representing my political viewpoint. The Liberals come closest, but in all good conscience I can’t back them this time.

Page 1 of 3

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén